MMA News Forums » MMA Forums » General MMA Forum

[Dr. MMA]

Originally Posted by Esox Express

Putting Fedor at #4 goes against both of these rules, 100%

If there are going to be rules, those who come up with the rankings should be obliged to follow them IMO. Other than that, I'm fairly indifferent. Just something else to hear people argue about...

How does it go against the rules?

A) Rankings are not based on opinion of fighter's skillset and potential but are based on evidence, i.e. fighter's opposition, track record, how dominant the wins were (dependent on opposition), and how dominant the losses were (dependent on opposition).

Fedor has the best track record in MMA, has beaten more top 10 HWs than any other HW in history, he has had more dominating wins against top opposition than anyone else and he has had only one dominating loss.

B) Recent victories hold more weight than historical, however, it doesn't negate it.

Highlighted the key words for you. More emphasis is placed on recent, but IT DOESN'T NEGATE the historical track record, and when it comes to historical track record, who can compete against a guy who stayed at #1 for 8 years?

[Mac]

Originally Posted by Dr. MMA

Fedor has the best track record in MMA, has beaten more top 10 HWs than any other HW in history, he has had more dominating wins against top opposition than anyone else and he has had only one dominating loss.

Serious question here. So how does Werdum get ranked higher than Fedor but that guy who dominated Fedor doesn't?

[Leucoethiops]

Originally Posted by Mac

Serious question here. So how does Werdum get ranked higher than Fedor but that guy who dominated Fedor doesn't?

Aside from having the win over Fedor in common; look at who each has fought and beaten.

Fabricio's been around, Silva JUST had his coming out party.

[Mac]

Originally Posted by Leucoethiops

Aside from having the win over Fedor in common; look at who each has fought and beaten.

Fabricio's been around, Silva JUST had his coming out party.

I agree that Werdum has been around longer although he has only fought three times in the last 2 years but based on this: A) Rankings are not based on opinion of fighter's skillset and potential but are based on evidence, i.e. fighter's opposition, track record, how dominant the wins were (dependent on opposition), and how dominant the losses were (dependent on opposition).

Doesn't the evidence strongly point to Silva being higher ranked than Fedor? I mean if we take opinion out of it as stated above then what does the evidence point to?

Same goes for JDS, he KOed Werdum and Werdum gets ranked higher? If we base this off of evidence then what stronger evidence is there then actually beating the guy head to head.

[Sakara=Excitement]

The rankings aren't being changed. It's all wasted breath at this point.

[Mac]

Originally Posted by Sakara=Excitement

The rankings aren't being changed. It's all wasted breath at this point.

No need to be an ass. If you don't want people to discuss them then we shouldn't even post them. Who are you anyway? The rankings Nazi?

[Chute_Boxe44]

I see what a couple of you are coming from. But lets be real guys, how can you possibly have him ranked above someone who just turned his face into hamburger meat?

It just makes no sense to me. Basically what its saying is that the guy who just destroyed him is still not a better fighter. It's kind of a slap in the face in my opinion

And I don't mean to make it seem like im pointing this at you Mac, I know your just putting up what they gave you

[Sakara=Excitement]

Originally Posted by Mac

No need to be an ass. If you don't want people to discuss them then we shouldn't even post them. Who are you anyway? The rankings Nazi?

No it's the same things Ive been saying when we were putting the rankings together. It doesn't matter what we would of voted on, someone is gonna bitch and moan and nothing will be changed about it. It's wasted breath on everyone's part. Rankings are wayyyyyy too subjective and I've said it from day one. But it's not discussing the rankings when the people making the rankings (in this case Dr. MMA) come out and explain why someone was ranked a certain way and people still argue about it...whats the point?

[The Return Of......]

most arguments or debates are point and counter point

i think someone is a bit touchy about there rankings

[Sakara=Excitement]

Originally Posted by Chute_Boxe44

I see what a couple of you are coming from. But lets be real guys, how can you possibly have him ranked above someone who just turned his face into hamburger meat?

It just makes no sense to me. Basically what its saying is that the guy who just destroyed him is still not a better fighter. It's kind of a slap in the face in my opinion

And I don't mean to make it seem like im pointing this at you Mac, I know your just putting up what they gave you

This is where Fedor's track record comes in to play against Silva. Fedor has fought 5 top 10 HW's in a row while Silva fought and lost to Werdum and has one top ten win in that time, against Fedor. You can't discredit what Fedor has done for losing his fight against Silva. But Silva moved up a ton with the win and Fedor dropped to #4 from #1/#2.